Analysis of Foreign Experience in Teaching Driving and Developing Driving Competencies



Currently, it is becoming increasingly important to study progressive methods of teaching driving. This article presents a comparative analysis of traditional and progressive approaches to driving education, using the GDE (Goals for Driving Education) matrix of driving education goals as a comparative criterion. An analysis of the rationale for a progressive approach based on the theories of foreign authors was carried out. The advantages of a progressive approach to driving education open up opportunities to bring the process of driver training to a new level — the formation of not only driving skills, but also the development of self-efficacy skills — the driver's self-assessment of his/her capabilities and limitations when driving, assessing the level of risk of his/her actions, confidence in his/her abilities. Driver self-efficacy skills serve to make driving safer in a road traffic environment. The analysis of international experience indicates that driving training within the framework of only one approach cannot fully meet the need for the development of cognitive skills of various levels and fully meet all the goals of the driver training model according to the matrix-GDE. To implement all the goals set for driving training and aimed at developing a wide range of driving competencies, an integrated approach is required.

General Information

Keywords: driving teaching, driving activity, self-efficacy, risky behavior, GDE-matrix, social attitudes, beliefs, search for dangers

Journal rubric: Special (Branch) Psychology

Article type: review article


Received: 06.12.2022


For citation: Zubova Y.V. Analysis of Foreign Experience in Teaching Driving and Developing Driving Competencies [Elektronnyi resurs]. Sovremennaia zarubezhnaia psikhologiia = Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 2023. Vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 7–15. DOI: 10.17759/jmfp.2023120101. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)


  1. Strategiya bezopasnosti dorozhnogo dvizheniya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii na 2018—2024 g. [Road safety strategy in the Russian Federation for 2018—2024 g.] [Elektronnyi resurs]: utverzhdena rasporyazheniem Pravitel'stva Rossiiskoi Federatsii ot 08 yanvarya 2018 g. Moscow. 19 p.The Russian Government URL: (дата Accessed 09.03.2023) (In Russ.).
  2. Chen C., Zhao X., Zhang Y., Rong J., Liu X. A graphical modeling method for individual driving behavior and its application in driving safety analysis using GPS data. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behavior, 2019. Vol. 63, pp. 118—134. DOI:10.1016/J.TRF.2019.03.017
  3. Rodwell D., Hawkins A., Haworth N., Larue G.S., Bates L., Filtness A. A mixed-methods study of driver education informed by the Goals for Driver Education: Do young drivers and educators agree on what was taught? Safety Science, 2018. Vol. 108, pp. 140—148. DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2018.04.017
  4. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1991. Vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 179—211. DOI:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
  5. Zhang Z., Ma T., Ji N., Hu Z., Zhu W. An assessment of the relationship between driving skills and driving behaviors among Chinese bus drivers. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 2020. Vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1—10. DOI:10.1177/1687814018824916
  6. Wang F., Zhang J., Wang S., Li S., Hou W. Analysis of driving behavior based on dynamic changes of personality states. International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. Vol. 17, no. 2, article ID 430, 18 p.DOI:10.3390/ijerph17020430
  7. Aniah E. The influence of Emotional Intelligence on Driving Behavior in the Transportation Sector: A literature review. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 2021. Vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1524—1537. DOI:10.47750/cibg.2021.27.06.121
  8. Apter M.J. Reversal theory and personality: A review. Journal of Research in Personality, 1984. Vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 265—288. DOI:10.1016/0092-6566(84)90013-8
  9. Bandura A. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1977. 247 p.
  10. Baran P., Zieli´nski P., Dziuda Ł. Personality and temperament traits as predictors of conscious risky car driving. Safety Science, 2021. Vol. 142, article ID 105361, 10 p.DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105361
  11. Barragan D., Lee Yi-C. Drivers assessment of hazard perception. Driving Assessment Conference, 2019, pp. 71—77. DOI:10.17077/drivingassessment.1677
  12. Bernstein J.P.K., Calamia M. Dimensions of driving-related emotions and behaviors: An exploratory factor analysis of common self-report measures. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2019. Vol. 124, pp. 85—91. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2019.01.004
  13. Bruner J.S. The process of education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1977. 72 p.
  14. Vetter M., Schünemann A.L., Brieber D., Debelak R., Gatscha M., Grünsteidel F., Herle M., Mandler G., Ortner T.M. Cognitive and personality determinants of safe driving performance in professional drivers. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2018. Vol. 52, pp. 191—201. DOI:10.1016/j.trf.2017.11.008
  15. De Geus E., Vlakveld W.P., Twisk D.A.M. Peer distraction: an experiment to assess impact on adolescent and adult cyclists’ hazard perception. Journal of Transportation Safety & Security, 2020. Vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 66—81. DOI:10.1080/19439962.2019.1591554
  16. Mcilroy R.C., Vu N., Bunyasi B. et al. Exploring the relationships between pedestrian behavior and traffic safety attitudes in six countries. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behavior, 2020. Vol. 68, pp. 257—271. DOI:10.1016/j.trf.2019.11.006
  17. Hatakka M., Keskinen E., Gregersen N.P., Glad A., Hernetkoski K. From control of the vehicle to personal self-control; broadening the perspectives to driver education. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2002. Vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 201—215. DOI:10.1016/S1369-8478(02)00018-9
  18. Han W., Zhao J. Driver behavior and traffic accident involvement among professional urban bus drivers in China. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behavior, 2020. Vol. 74, pp. 184—197. DOI:10.1016/j.trf.2020.08.007
  19. Junghwa K., Hideki S.T., Jan-Dirk S. Joint car ownership and car type preference model considering engagement in online activities and environmental concern. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2020. Vol. 68, pp. 293—305. DOI:10.1016/j.trf.2019.11.012
  20. Kolb D.A., Kolb A.Y. Experiential Learning Theory as a Guide for Experiential Educators in Higher Education. Experiential Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 2017. Vol. 1, no. 1. DOI:10.46787/elthe.v1i1.3362
  21. Lai E.R. Metacognition: A Literature Review. Pearson’s Research Reports, 2011. 41 p.
  22. Ramos É.M.S., Bergstad C.J., Nässén J. Understanding daily car use: Driving habits, motives, attitudes, and norms across trip purposes. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2020. Vol. 68, pp. 306—315. DOI:10.1016/j.trf.2019.11.013
  23. Sârbescu P., Maricuţoiu L. Are you a “bad driver” all the time? Insights from a weekly diary study on personality and dangerous driving behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 2019. Vol. 80, pp. 30—37. DOI:10.1016/j.jrp.2019.04.003
  24. Senserrick T., Cullen P., Baffsky R. et al. Self-harm in adolescence and risk of crash: a 13-year cohort study of novice drivers in New South Wales, Australia. Injury Preventio. Online ahead of print. 2023. 7 p.DOI:10.1136/ip-2022-044807
  25. Wang X., Liu Y., Wang J., Zhang J. Study on influencing factors selection of driver‟s propensity. Transportation research part D: Transport and environment, 2019. Vol. 66, pp. 35—48. DOI:10.1016/j.trd.2018.06.025
  26. Bates L., Hawkins A., Rodwell D., Levi A., Watson B., Filtness A., Larue G.S. The effect of psychosocial factors on perceptions of driver education using the goals for driver education framework. Transportation Research, 2019. Vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 151—161. DOI:10.1016/j.trf.2019.09.004
  27. Louw T., Hajiseyedjavadi F., Jamson A.H., Romano R., Boer E.R., Merat N. The Relationship between Sensation Seeking and Speed Choice in Road Environments with Different Levels of Risk [Elektronnyi resurs]. Proceedings of the Tenth International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training and Vehicle Design (New Mexico, June 24—27, 2019 g.). Washington: The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2019, pp. 29—35. URL: (Accessed 07.03.2023).
  28. Chu W., Wu C.Z., Atomb C., Atomb H., Özkan T. Traffic climate, driver behavior, and accidents involvement in China. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2020. Vol. 122, pp. 119—126. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2018.09.007
  29. Zhang T., Hajiseyedjavadi F., Wang Y., Samuel S., Qu X., Fisher D. Training interventions are only effective on careful drivers, not careless drivers. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2018. Vol. 58, pp. 693—707. DOI:10.1016/j.trf.2018.07.004
  30. Trimpop R.M. The psychology of risk taking behavioral [Elektronnyi resurs]. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1994. ‎416 p.URL: (Accessed 07.03.2023).
  31. Watson-Brown N., Scott-Parker B., Senserrick T. Association between higher-order driving instruction and risky driving behaviours: Exploring the mediating effects of a self-regulated safety orientation. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2019. Vol. 131, pp. 275—283. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2019.07.005
  32. Zhang F., Mehrotra S., Roberts S.C. Driving distracted with friends: Effect of passengers and driver distraction on young drivers’ behavior. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2019. Vol. 132, article ID 105246, 9 p. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2019.07.022

Information About the Authors

Yana V. Zubova, International Driving Coach (RoSPA), Training Center "Aktiv-Bezopasnost" (Active-Safety), Moscow, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:



Total: 250
Previous month: 45
Current month: 12


Total: 90
Previous month: 4
Current month: 13